Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Dementia care motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

thoughts[edit]

Contribution from u3082340

Hello! Very interesting topic - definitely not something I would have thought of. Just fixed a couple of little tedious grammatical things - like needed capitals, etc. May have missed a few so maybe have a double check. Were also a couple of spelling errors. I've also got a few suggestions:

  • Maybe put your 'stages' of dementia into a table - just so it's a little easier to read.
  • Your content and information is really interesting, and the topic is something I personally resonate with - however perhaps there's a little too many stats on the prevalence and issues within the disease rather than unit content?
  • You could integrate more theory/ theories. I understand the due date is creeping up but maybe have a look at another theory of motivation. Perhaps The Incentive Theory of Motivation would be relevant, in the form of the incentive being the well being of a loved one?

Here's some more info on the theory! http://psychology.about.com/od/motivation/a/incentive-theory-of-motivation.htm Just some ideas! Otherwise great topic, goodluck!

u3082340 (discusscontribs)

I think a nice way to present some of the information for this topic would be firstly just look at 'caring' in a general underlying sort of way, and how maybe morality and altruism fit into this for all (or most) humans. Then, and I really don't know much about this topic, but you could maybe find some studies that suggest more specific biological differences in those that choose to become nurses, volunteer carers etc., and present them as biological, or nature, bases for motivating people to care and extrapolate that to caring for people with dementia. Then perhaps you could find more overt motivational reasons that are on the nurture side, such as having a family member go being affected or something like that. I think this sort of funneling down presentation of the information, from very broad human aspects to specific biological differences and then particular life experiences would be a nice way to go about it. Good luck! Joelthebaws (discusscontribs) 06:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

--JenJen (discusscontribs) 07:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)There is a position paper by The Australian Psychological Society on "Psychology and Ageing" that I thought you might find interesting. It has a bit about caregiving and dementia in it too. Hope its useful, if not it's still an interesting read.--JenJen (discusscontribs) 07:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

--JenJen (discusscontribs) 07:52, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Sorry I meant to put in the link. Here tis link http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/Position-Paper-Ageing.pdf--JenJen (discusscontribs) 07:52, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I think this is a very interesting topic as dementia is becoming a prevalent disease in older people and in research. Here's an article that talks about positive and negative aspects of caring for dementia patients. It might give you some ideas about why carers specifically work with dementia patients and whether they do it for the rewards or not. http://zh9bf5sp6t.scholar.serialssolutions.com/?sid=google&auinit=S&aulast=Andr%C3%A9n&atitle=Family+caregivers%E2%80%99+subjective+experiences+of+satisfaction+in+dementia+care:+aspects+of+burden,+subjective+health+and+sense+of+coherence&id=doi:10.1111/j.1471-6712.2005.00328.x&title=Scandinavian+journal+of+caring+sciences&volume=19&issue=2&date=2005&spage=157&issn=0283-9318 (excuse the large hyperlink). Good luck with your book chapter! --U3054867 (discusscontribs) 03:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

APA style captions for images and tables[edit]

I recommend using APA style captions i.e., Figure 1, Figure 2 etc. for all images, graphs etc. and Table 1, Table 2 etc. for all tables. The caption text should not be in italics. For more detail and examples, see http://libguides.newcastle.edu.au/content.php?pid=113807&sid=1208571 -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:12, 23 October 2014 (UTC)


edit[edit]

Hi, just letting you know that I've done an extremeley minor edit to your page. The second image you had said figure 3, but was actually figure 2 so Ive gone ahead and changed that for you :) --U3072703 (discusscontribs) 22:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Minor edit needed[edit]

Hey

I'm liking the look of this article, flows well and easy to read, concisely summarizes the important information, good references and external links

i noticed your table labeling is mixed up, table 2 comes first

let me know if you want someone to check over your page once the motivation theory stuff goes up, ill be working on my masochism page into the evening :)

Taya88 (discusscontribs) 02:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Heading casing[edit]

Crystal Clear app ktip.svg
FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use:

==Cats and dogs==

rather than

==Cats and Dogs==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:32, 26 October 2014 (UTC)


Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's Moodle site. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below. If you would like further clarification about the marking or feedback, contact the unit convener. If you wish to dispute the marks, see the suggested marking dispute process.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, a very hard hitting and relevant presentation, well done.

Structure and content[edit]

  1. There was a nice effort to include theory, including an in depth analysis using SDT. For improvement, include mention of other theories and a higher emphasis on research studies.

Communication[edit]

  1. Overall, Jing was used to great effect, and the presentation was creative and engaging. For improvement, the text on the slides could be larger, and the use of a case study or real life example might help to further engage the viewer

Production quality[edit]

  1. The presentation quality was sound, well done. Relevant links, image refs and licensing info must also be included, thus this presentation likely violates copyright law. Courtney.Bruce (discusscontribs) 03:47, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback query[edit]

Hi, I noticed in the multimedia feedback that a note was made I hadn't provided links or referenced the images used. In fact all references and all 3 images are listed on the page, although small, they are definitely there. If further evidence is needed I can provide a screen shot. Kind regards, --Annamoured (discusscontribs) 09:48, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


Chapter review and feedback

This chapter has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Please also check the chapter's page history to check for editing changes made whilst reviewing through the chapter. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Chapter marks will be available later via Moodle, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, this chapter provides a good overview of motivations for dementia care. For more feedback, see my copyedits and comments below.

Theory[edit]

  1. The chapter focused on an Australian context, however this wasn't specified in the topic/title.
  2. In order to better address the specific topic, the content about dementia could be abbreviated and the content about dementia care and dementia care motivation could be expanded.
  3. SDT is described generally (could be abbreviated) and then applied to dementia care, but this doesn't appear to be based on any peer-reviewed resources.
  4. The conclusion could be strengthened by providing take-home messages to focus questions established in the Overview.

Research[edit]

  1. There is probably over-reporting of demographic descriptive statistics about dementia.
  2. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  3. Some statements were unreferenced - see the [factual?] tags

Written expression[edit]

  1. Written expression in this chapter is reasonably good.
  2. Learning features
    1. Some links to Wikipedia and/or Wikiversity articles were added as external links - these should be changed to interwiki links
  3. Spelling and grammar are very good.
    1. Proofreading was reasonably good, but some errors were noted e.g., see my edits
    2. Semi-colons are over/incorrectly used
  4. Layout
    1. See earlier comments about heading casing
  5. APA style
    1. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numbers (e.g., 10)
    2. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets
    3. In-text citations in brackets at the end of sentences should be placed before the full-stop.
    4. The reference list is not in complete APA style
    5. In-text citations should be in alphabetical order
    6. When there are three or more authors, subsequent citations should use et al. e.g., Smith, Bush and Western (2001) and then in the next paragraph cite Smith et al. (2001).


    1. Direct quotes need page numbers.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:43, 24 November 2014 (UTC)